The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 01:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
Out of the lane? (Video)

Watch this play: Top Plays - April 24, 2012 - YouTube

Added by APG:

I'm curious in opinions whether you think this batter-runner should be called out for being out of the lane.

In my opinion, this runner purposely tried to get himself in the catcher's throwing lane for the expressed purpose of producing what happened. He goes from fair to foul territory. You can even see the batter-runner take a quick glance over his right shoulder, he sees where the catcher is, and then he veers in that direction. That's not very common. He probably figured, "I'm going to be out any way - why not complicate things and put it in the hands of the umpires and force them to make an uncommon interference call."

Last edited by APG; Mon Aug 18, 2014 at 04:02pm. Reason: embed
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 01:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 176
In a FED rules game, I would call the BR out for interference, he is clearly b oth feet outside the running lane and interfered with the throw.

For NCAA/OBR, (I dont work NCAA level), I understand the requirement is interference with the F3's ability to catch a quality throw. Since F2's throw is beyond F3's reach, this isnt interference. I dont think intent matters, requirement for interference being out of the running lane is position of the runner, and interference with the catch.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 01:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 919
Good gamesmanship. Bad throw. No infraction.
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?"
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 02:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,240
"Trying to interfere" is not "interfering" (although the definition of the latter varies by code).

Your play is not really any different from R1 trying to swat down F4's throw to F3 to turn a double play. If R1 doesn't touch the ball, you won't have INT.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 02:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
I didn't mean to infer that the runner "trying" to interfere is, in itself, interference. I just found it interesting that the runner did make a concerted effort to position himself in the catcher's throwing lane. Personally, I think it's brilliant on the part of the runner. I'm sure he knows that he's going to be put out quite easily. Why not muddy the water in the process? If the umpire calls him out for interference - fine! He was going to be out anyway. If the umpire doesn't call him out for interference (as in this case) - even better!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 08:21pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
The catcher would have helped the case if he had plugged the runner in the back, instead of trying to throw around him.

In FED, RLI because they don't want quality throw to be a factor, and I suppose they don't want catchers plugging runners in the back. In NCAA, not a quality throw.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 08:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by DG View Post
The catcher would have helped the case if he had plugged the runner in the back, instead of trying to throw around him.

In FED, RLI because they don't want quality throw to be a factor, and I suppose they don't want catchers plugging runners in the back. In NCAA, not a quality throw.
Catchers (on well coached teams) are never taught to "plug a batter" because, if he misses the batter, you may end up with both a bad throw and no interference call.

Instead, if the catcher notices the runner is out of the lane and blocking his throw, he should target the first baseman, not the runner. That's not to say he should throw around the runner, rather, he should throw through the runner. Just pretend the runner is invisible. If it hits him - fine! You should get an interference call. If it misses him - fine! You were throwing to the first baseman anyway.

The mistake this catcher made, obviously, was trying to loft the ball over the runner - exactly what the runner was hoping for, I imagine.

So, the consensus seems to be: FED = interference. NCAA/OBR = nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 09:16pm
Is this a legal title?
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 360
In Play 5 (the first one shown), if the PU had been F5, would you have OBS?

I would.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 18, 2014, 09:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Publius View Post
In Play 5 (the first one shown), if the PU had been F5, would you have OBS?

I would.
Hmmm - that's a tough one. He was certainly crowding her but it's not clear that it hindered her in any way. Not sure. I think she was complaining about the PU being in her way, though.

I'm pretty sure that the PU was out of position on that one. Certainly, he had somewhere to be that was better than where he was.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 19, 2014, 07:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Publius View Post
In Play 5 (the first one shown), if the PU had been F5, would you have OBS?

I would.
Me too.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 19, 2014, 04:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,729
!

Quote:
"Catchers (on well coached teams) are never taught to "plug a batter" . . . "
More standard drivel from this wanna be poster. Many top teams and professional teams teach "drill him between the numbers and then say to the PU 'see where he's on the ground -- not in the runners lane.'"

Tee
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 20, 2014, 07:38pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Emerling View Post
Catchers (on well coached teams) are never taught to "plug a batter" because, if he misses the batter, you may end up with both a bad throw and no interference call.

Instead, if the catcher notices the runner is out of the lane and blocking his throw, he should target the first baseman, not the runner. That's not to say he should throw around the runner, rather, he should throw through the runner. Just pretend the runner is invisible. If it hits him - fine! You should get an interference call. If it misses him - fine! You were throwing to the first baseman anyway.

The mistake this catcher made, obviously, was trying to loft the ball over the runner - exactly what the runner was hoping for, I imagine.

So, the consensus seems to be: FED = interference. NCAA/OBR = nothing.
I guess I was not a good coach, back in the day when I coached, because I told catchers to throw the ball directly to F3 and if there was no throwing lane to F3 because BR is out of the lane, do it anyway and the umpire would make the call. At least if they drilled the BR in the back the ball would not be in RF. Of course if you can get a throwing path to F3 take it.

Lobbing the ball around or over BR was not coached.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Video request: Mercer basket with 1:07 left in 2nd half (Video) Nevadaref Basketball 13 Sat Mar 22, 2014 03:04pm
Video Request Indiana Miami: Foul causes a travel (Video Added) Sharpshooternes Basketball 12 Fri May 24, 2013 04:44pm
Video Request: Michigan v. Florida (Video Added) JRutledge Basketball 11 Mon Apr 01, 2013 06:43am
Video request: OVC Title game Murray St. vs. Belmont (Video Added) JRutledge Basketball 8 Sat Mar 23, 2013 06:18pm
How lane occupants can enter the lane HawkeyeCubP Basketball 14 Fri Jan 23, 2009 02:40pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1